<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)">
<div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default">It was certainly not my intention to cause upset, apologies for that.</div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default"><br></div></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default"></div><div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default">At
a certain point, all of us here who understand the function of the DNS
and the processes of ICANN are already in a kind of elite position that
has us out of touch with the Internet's
underserved to various extents. I had the opportunity to serve in a role of providing
connectivity in African and Latin American refugee camps under contract
to UNHCR for a number of years, so I have first-hand experience with many of the
challenges and solutions at play in such environments. But that is
certainly not the same as living there.</div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default">That
is why I advocate so strongly for the need for evidence and research,
to not take Roberto's word or mine or anyone else's here on faith, but
to honestly investigate the needs of the underserved and
the available solutions. It is also why I strongly reject Alfredo's
stated approach to policy, choosing the path of least resistance
under the guise of "practicality". At best such <span id="m_499856997572865949:4ft.1" role="menuitem" aria-haspopup="true">an</span> approach will maintain the status quo and at worst will cause decline.<br></div></div><span class="gmail-im"><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 4:49 PM Roberto Gaetano via At-Large <<a href="mailto:at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a>> wrote:</span></div></div>
</div></span></div><span class="gmail-im"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></span></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">As
I have stated many times, I believe that “Internet is for everyone”
means that everybody should have the same ease of use and interaction
regardless the difference they have from the dominant model. This
includes the right of having their digital identity
- like a web site or an email address - being usable and accessible
regardless the fact that there are other possibilities or turnarounds,
or even other ways to assert their digital identity. This is my red
line, that I will never cross.</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default">I agree violently with Roberto that access to the Internet and digital identity must be universal, I would even call it <span id="m_499856997572865949:4ft.2" role="menuitem" aria-haspopup="true">an</span>
aspirational human right. Where we differ is in the suitability of a
DNS-based domain name for that purpose. To me, domain names are among
the most expensive and least sustainable forms of Internet identity
currently available. Memorable domain names serve numerous roles, but
personal identity is among their weakest. There are many, MANY reasons
for this, but the most obvious is that your Internet identity must not
demand <span id="m_499856997572865949:4ft.3" role="menuitem" aria-haspopup="true">an</span> annual fee, which if left unpaid (even by accident) can be acquired by someone else.<br></div></div><div><br></div><div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default">To me the line demanding that everyone has access to <span id="m_499856997572865949:4ft.4" role="menuitem" aria-haspopup="true">an</span>
Internet domain is not only not red, it is drawn with dust. There are
many other ways to claim a digital identity, almost all of them superior
to Internet domains. Most of them are free of cost (let alone annual
fee). And a number of them, such as OpenSSL and Mastodon accounts, do
not require putting your identity in the hands of a commercial
organization that profits from use (or spread) of personal information.<br></div></div><div><br></div><div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default">We
must also acknowledge the effect of progress and technical evolution.
New forms of digital identity exist now that weren't dreamed of 20 years
ago but dominate today. My children hate using email and my
grandchildren don't know what email is, but they are all very well
connected. What they do use, from Signal to Discord to Xing to WhatsApp
to Wechat, all have flat namespaces and (critical to the UA discussion)
most are quite happy with Unicode characters in IDs. Generally only
global trademark holders care about "memorable" IDs because everyone can
use aliases for which duplicates are OK. And if all you need is chat
and finance, even SMS suffices for identity if you choose not to fully
connect (and that choice must be available too).<br><br>These are not
stopgap or compromise solutions, they are indeed the mainstream
accessible forms of digital identity today and it is Internet domains
that are the archaic and inferior alternative. (It is these IDs that I
put in my standard signature, not my phone or email.) The rise of AI in
general use only accelerates the decline of domains as identity. I
assert that this reality is a primary reason that IDNs have such poor
uptake from consumers and app developers, the interest for them
primarily comes from financially-interested domain sellers and not from
anyone needing <span id="m_499856997572865949:4ft.5" role="menuitem" aria-haspopup="true">an</span>
identity. There is simply too little bottom-up consumer demand, a
phenomenon that we in At-Large must comprehend to adequately represent
the end-user PoV on the issues of IDNs and UA.</div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default">But,
as I said before, this is only my opinion, even though I believe it to
be well-informed by first-hand experience. I await being disproven. Let's get some evidence.<br></div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;color:rgb(11,83,148)" class="gmail_default">Cheers,</div></div></div>
</div></div><br><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:12.8px">Evan Leibovitch, <span style="font-size:12.8px">Toronto Canada</span></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><span style="font-size:12.8px">@evanleibovitch / </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">@el56</span></div></div></div></div>